Rebranding

Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.

[Wcccleaver]

What's up with the whole rebranding that's going on at Walnut Creek? I recently noticed that they are moving from Walnut Creek Community Church to just Walnut Creek Church? Is there a reason for this?

[AgathaL'Orange]

I hadn't noticed!  But if true, they would be continuing down a looooooooong line of name changes over the years.  Pretty soon, I'm sure the movement will change to something like "Great Commisions" and the churches will be named "Kapow" or "The Stone" or "Mission 647" or some other sense nonsense.  I think these days Google makes the information so easily accessible.  In fact, Google and Yahoo are what helped me find the "bad stuff" waaaay back in the day. In fact almost as soon as I had access to a search engine I did a Boolean search (remember it was Boolean, right?) on "Great Commission and cult" and the rest is history! 

[Linda]

I'll bet many here can remember the sickening feeling they had when they "Googled" "Great Commission and cults" and results popped up.

When we did our search it was 2005, before this forum and so what came up was pretty much the Rick Ross site and other cult watch sites. I was nauseated and felt physically weak as I read on. It was one of the most sobering moments of my life and probably the worst feeling I've had as a parent. I had led my kids there thinking it was safe and theologically sound.

The forum and gcx must be invaluable to people searching now.

[Outtathere]

Why do I have to come to this forum to learn who Jim McCotter is? Why do I have to learn about the weaknesses here?
I blame myself a lot of the time. I never researched their theology and whether or not they were seminary trained. I can think of so many instances where negative comments were made towards people with formal training.

I'm curious, Wcccleaver, as to when you found out about this forum. Did people in the church know about it? What do they say about it, or is it one of those things that people learn to ignore? I also felt nauseated when I read the posts for the first time.

[Linda]

Those are great questions, Outtathere.

I am with you. We had never heard the name Jim McCotter until we did that Google search. He had been referred to as, "my pastor in Ames" and it was always followed by how he was persecuted by the Des Moines Register. After we found we had been misled by elders (by what they didn't tell us or brushed off), we called Larry Pile and purchased his book "Marching to Zion", I sleuthed up some dates, went to my local library, and ordered the microfiche of the DM Register which is now available on the gcx site, but it wasn't in 2005.

http://www.gcxweb.org/Articles/DSR-11-26-1978-b.aspx
http://www.gcxweb.org/Articles/DSR-11-26-1978-a.aspx

It was in those articles that I read:

Part of the taped sermon was based on Proverbs 20:30, which McCotter translates as, "Blows that wound cleanse away evil; strokes make clean the innermost parts."

On the tape, McCotter says, "When you discipline, this verse indicates, as others do, that you want to do it so it wounds. Now, when you say 'wounds,' it doesn't mean that you have a bloody mess on your hands necessarily. It doesn't mean that you have a child 'wounding' like he has a broken leg."

McCotter added in his taped sermon that this means you have been severe enough that the child's attitude at that point has been reversed.
"And he may, and often will be, black and blue," McCotter continued. "My children have been many times. And it cleans evil from them."

About a week later, we were "outtathere".

I think it would be insightful if people answered your questions:

When and How did you find out about this forum?
What do your leaders say about this forum?

[Outtathere]

"Secondary sources who discuss the greater movement, do not cease to speak of it as a movement when it reorganizes or renames. North and South, 2002 Christian Post, 2008
Thanks for these links! I had never seen either one, actually. The Jim McCotter one doesn't seem relevant at all: I've heard of his name in the context of GCC, but he has almost nothing to do with GCM. To be honest, I think of him as a little sorta weird/scary. But he's had zero connection to anything I've ever done, so I can't speak to it. The Christian Post article is helpful: that was right at the 2004/5 transition."

The above comment was found on the 'Talk' section of the Great Commission Churches Wikepedia entry. It looks like people have done a spin job on that site. The reason I include this is that rebranding may serve a purpose of avoiding past history. Perhaps if you do a google search of your church, controversial matters may arise about a pastor or the church in general. As you can see from the above quote, even a person who is in the national office is ignorant of the church's history, so keeping quiet could serve a purpose.

That being said, I don't know of the pastor who founded our church that I now attend, since he served over 40 years ago. Then again, people aren't referring to his doctrine either. My feeling in GC is that there are some churches who have more ties to the past than others.

Wcccleaver, does your church rely alot on marketing? That may be the simplest reason for rebranding. How many churches do you have in your city? Maybe they just put a lot of hope in advertising. Does the group use a lot of catchy names for services/events? I went to a retreat once and every person was sporting a church shirt or sweatshirt. I wore a sweater (awkward).

[Linda]

Perhaps if you do a google search of your church, controversial matters may arise about a pastor or the church in general.

I have done a Google search of every church I've ever attended and currently attend followed by the words "and cult". One of the churches was even part of a big Christian commune with it's own compound that everyone gave all their life savings to when they joined. Guess what I got on Google? Nothing.

Jim McCotter is very relevant to the every GC elder  and church member (but I will say many might not know who he is because they keep his name on the down low). First, every elder can trace his authority to Jim McCotter. Remember in the GC system, elders appoint elders. Jim was the self-appointed apostle who started appointing elders. Secondly, they have never corrected any of the bad teaching he did in his book "Elders and Apostles" which, by the way, was published/sold by GC and co-authored by Dennis Clark who currently sits on the national board.

Here, you can even read it.

http://www.gcxweb.org/Books/Leadership/

I believe all the current members of the national board, sat at McCotters feet and learned from him.

Also, GCM was started by GCC. Now, GCM tries to distance themselves from GCC. GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI...all part of the GC family. As the Welcome says on this forum. "Welcome to De-Commissioned, a forum for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, and the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology."

[Outtathere]

Summitview has kept their name for years without changing, as has Evergreen (although both have used the Rock), and Stonebrook has been the same in Iowa for years as has Walnut Creek (but I know Stonebrook has used the name Rock as well for a campus service). I think the naming thing is to be more trendy, but that's my opinion.

The group I was in tended to be somewhat nerdy and attract socially awkward people like myself. However, you felt a pressure to be cool and relevant to culture, and those who were 'cooler' seemed to be held in higher regard.

How closely is GCM still with the rest of the movement? Perhaps it is a good thing that they are creating some distance. Which chapters or regions of Great Commission have the closest ties to McCotter's theology? I understand that they all do to some degree, but I'm curious as to which ones seem to bring out the Kool-Aid regularly.

I can pinpoint moments of indoctrination. My freshman year I went to a fall retreat. I can't begin to express how much pressure was on me to go. I went and was moved to tears by the speaker, Mark D. I almost left the church later that year because my pastor wasn't as moving as Mark. Later, I was constantly told to go to Leadership Training for a summer. My thinking towards everything GC changed after that. I thought much clearer and was more objective to the weaknesses in GC before I went.

Does GCM still do LT? It seems that they do, but the other churches do not. Is that because LT isn't what it used to be, or is there a rift between the organizations? Is there something to replace LT for other churches? I remember not going to an LT and feeling left out the next fall because I didn't have the latest t-shirt 

[EverAStudent]

What precisely did YOU learn at LT, or at least, what do you remember from the teaching at LT?

[Outtathere]

Honestly I don't remember a whole lot anymore from teachings. Almost like how I no longer have specific recollection of specific lectures I went to in college. I do remember being physically exhausted. We got jobs together and worked and ate together, which I enjoyed with the fellowship. Afterwards, I remember going to teachings or meetings on many nights.

One day I was so wiped out that I fell asleep after work and slept until the meeting time and was awoken and brought to the meeting. I remembered not wanting to go and later not feeling like I was doing enough. Good question, everastudent. I honestly don't remember a whole lot of teachings. I do remember being very emotional and I remember a lot of sexual tension in the group. I do remember evangelism, evangelism and evangelism from almost every speaker and suffering from Mark D (how the Christian life is suffering and how he was suffering). There was always a certain amount of hype before a dynamic speaker would come. They all had a bit of a celebrity aura about them.

[EverAStudent]

That is actually informative.  

I have a theory that essentially states that we remember many details of very specific and highly helpful lessons (whether college, seminary, or church), but we forget the specifics of lectures that are emotionally charged but are otherwise unhelpful or lacking in factual or practical insights.

For example, I remember with relative clarity the specifics of college classes that taught me computer alogrithym flowcharting, but have forgotten entirely the two semesters of Calculus.  Similarly, I remember some of the exciting and detailed discussions on Old Testament and New Testament survey classes from the seminary prof, but can recall little of the evangelism lectures (except the generalized "get out there and preach to the lost").  

It seems to me that if GC were preaching practical and useful lessons on how to study, interpret, and implement Scripture then much more of what they taught would be retained in our active memories.  As it is, I think they rely on emotionalism to coax out temporary and forgettable emotional reactions and thus miss the opportunity to make a lasting and meaningful contribution to our spiritual growth.

The day I left GC I remember going to another church and I still remember many details of that day's teachings and the next two years of Bible instruction at the Baptist church we subsequently attended.  Now those are good and useful memories.

[Outtathere]

That is very accurate to use the word 'emotionalism'. I'll try to make an observation that ties to the post of rebranding and then offer another observation. I think a lot of rebranding, whether it be fashion, website, worship or speakers is tied into producing emotional responses.

Certain speakers at LT would be very emotional. I would look around the room and see people weeping when they would talk. That doesn't happen in the churches I have gone to since. Usually, when they would speak of the lost and reaching the lost and saving them from hell, they would be unable to continue or would weep themselves, or their voices would crack. A lot of the LT speakers did this. At first (by the way, I went to 2 LT's), it seemed sincere and I found myself letting my guard down and often having emotional experiences. After a while, it was almost predictable when they were going to become emotional.

When I left, it was very hard to have a 'normal' church experience. In retrospect, I became addicted to the emotionalism and judged people or churches that didn't seem as energetic. I remember thinking to myself that they were detached and didn't take the gospel seriously.

[EverAStudent]

Their emotionalism and zeal were part of their branding in the early days.  They often derisively referred to all other churches as "those traditional churches" and would infer or overtly state that all other churches were dead and ineffectual and that only GC (i.e. Brand X) was the superior ecclessial formulation. 

Over the years I have found numerous movements (denominations, philosophies, and doctrinal offshoots) use the same ploy.  They refer to all other churches as "dead" "frozen" or "lacking" in the proper emotion which only Brand X can generate.  I am getting very sick of factions proclaiming their own superiority, often on the basis of emotionalism, while giving blanket denouncements about other churches. 

Be warned...next time you hear someone offer a sweeping insult that all "other churches are dead" know this: 1) they are lying/mistaken/deluded, 2) they are trying to distract you from noticing the flaws in their own institutions, 3) they are selling a counterfeit bill of goods, 4) they are full of themselves instead of the Word and the Spirit.

[Innerlight]

Well said EAS-

This is something that the Apostle Paul would be aghast at, one church trumping another.  It reminds of the divisions in Corinth...I am for Cephas, I am for Apollos, I am for Paul...  I know it's not one hundred percent accurate, but the concept is the same.  It saddens me when I hear of the latest and greatest church that has arisen, and all the people flock to it, as if somehow the small, dedicated poor church had fallen out of God's favor.  We should not be creating factions!!!  A relative of mine at Evergreen told me, no older people go there...How sad, to miss all that wisdom, experience, teaching, just so the music can be a little louder and the shirts more un-tucked...all in the name of getting more in...at the expense of those who left. 

I have never once heard my pastor denigrate another church...mine is small (medium), and two miles away is a huge mega-church, he encourages us to feed on the Word where we can, and if they have a Bible Study...go for it!  How great to not deal with ego. or some sort of weird one-up-man-ship.     

Have a Great Easter!
IL...   

[blonde]

Evergreen Community Church has changed the name to "Evergreen Church."